[linux-audio-dev] XAP: a polemic

Steve Harris S.W.Harris at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Sat Dec 14 19:55:01 UTC 2002


On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 01:19:08 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> > Yes, that was my conclusion too. Its much cleaner than c++, but its
> > pretty slow. I'm quite supprised that Apple went for it for DSP
> > code.
> 
> OTOH, have you looked at how the VST host/plugin interface is 
> actually implemented? Pretty "interesting". :-) (And here we worry 
> about function call overhead...)

No, but I've heard that its not really c++ underneath. I'm always worried
about looking at things like that incase I even want to implement
something similar. I think its better to knwo its a (IPR) clean
implementation.

> Seriously though, I think a plugin API of this kind *needing* C++ 
> would suggest that there's something wrong with the design. It 
> shouldn't be that complex.

I agree. Sometime its nice to have OO contructs inside plugins though, eg.
filters are very clean if implemented with OO.

- Steve



More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list